Well played Google. This is precisely compliant with the letter of law and their agreement with the CRTC, while at the same time doesn't give legacy media the free paycheque they lobbied their friends in government for.
You know non-profits are required to have open books, right? We can see where that money is going. I suspect they would rather give the money to small independent outlets in an attempt to foster diverse media as opposed to giving it to post media outlet number #4103 (The Montreal Gazette in this case).
>You know non-profits are required to have open books, right? We can see where that money is going.
We who? As in the CRA? Every business has to open their books for the CRA when asked. Non-profits have to file their taxes and are subject to audit, but this isn't really much different than any corporation.
Non profits share their financial statements, that's a lot different from "open books". Financial statements don't include lists of what entities got what payments, they have at most a dozen or so categories with some breakdowns on specific categories in the notes.
Nothing to see here folks, just an American-owned paper throwing a fit because they didn't get a piece of Google's payout that was intended to help Canadian-owned content.
Despite post media's (shocking) misgivings, I don't really see anything wrong with this yet. Pending the review by the CRTC this may just be Google wanting to foster a diverse set of independent news outlets that aren't beholden to the big players like post media. Diverse news is good for google because it drives traffic to their aggregation sites.
> Despite post media's (shocking) misgivings, I don't really see anything wrong with this yet.
What's wrong with this is that it's a complete perversion of the intention of the law. The intention is to make Google pay the organizations that are driving traffic to Google. When you Google Canadian news, they're not serving links to these nobody lefty outlets. They're primarily serving links to the CBC, PostMedia publications, CTV, the Globe and Mail, and other legacy corporate media. Seriously, try it yourself. Google a topic of Canadian news interest. See how many pages through the results you need to go before you find one of the groups in the CJC, and see how many PostMedia or CBC links you get on earlier pages.
If Google has found a way to subvert the intention of the Online News Act, then it means our government will need a new mechanism to force Google to pay the organizations generating its traffic. That means more legislation, more legal battles, more expense for the tax payer, and Canadian news outlets continue to get fucked by a foreign megacorporation in the mean time.
You have it backwards. It's google that drives the traffic to cbc or global or postmedia or wherever. Anyone can just go to those sites on their own. But they don't. They choose Google first.
Did you read the article? There are some legit concerns, especially around why a two month old non-profit is creating an agreement with Google (which includes indemnity.)
Nah. This is bell and rogers being salty. They lobbied the government for this bill. /r/canada shat all over it (rightfully so). So instead of blocking the news like meta did, google decided to go with a collective of independent outlets. It’s a brand new non-profit because these independent agencies needed a single group to bargain with google.
Now it’s being framed as a bunch of “lefty media” because the traditional media in Canada leans right, they got cut out, and they happen to all be owned by bell and rogers.
They got fucked by their own law and I’m pumped about it.
>because the traditional media in Canada leans right
LOL What Canada have you been living in? Media in Canada have trended left minus a few outlets for the last 50 years. Even the Toronto Star had the moniker of The Red Star back in the 1980s. Global News of the 1980s was distinctly right-wing though.
[Canadian media is not left-leaning](https://www.readthemaple.com/election-endorsements/). If it was we wouldn't be seeing virtually every publication in the country routinely endorse Conservative politicians.
Canadian media is left-leaning. Endorsements are editorial - aka Opinion. The opinion section does not drive the news section, which is where bias is inherent in the reporting. Determining whether or not the publication is left, centre or right.
How do you people still manage to mess this up repeatedly?
Newspaper: Tells everyone to vote Conservative for decades.
You: Clearly they're biased towards the Liberals.
Bit of a hot take there buddy, saying that they're left-leaning because articles that are expected to follow basic journalistic integrity such as fact checking is biased towards the left. They're allowed to print whatever they want in opinion pieces, that's how you find their bias.
Opinion section: This is who we think you should vote for.
News section: Carries bias, with reporters own input on who you should vote for in every story leaking in.
You younger kids really didn't get a very good education on how journalism is supposed to work, and how it currently works now. Guess the old timer we had back in the early 1990s that ran our city paper for 50 years was right, modern generations would be fundamentally ignorant on what is happening and confuse the two no matter what.
> Media in Canada have trended left
80% of print/digital media is post media. Owned by a republican tied new jersey hedge fund known for catch and killing for Donald Trump in 2016. They own and have shut down a fuck ton of small local papers to push their narrative. You gotta be outta your mind to think Canadian media is "left". The star is still "left" despite being owned by conservative donors.
CBC is centre left.
Global/ctv/globeandmail are all center right.
Hedge funds don't direct media, they only care about profitability. That's why they shutdown a "fuck ton of small local papers" that had already been reprinting news 4 days old. The internet killed them when they abandoned local news.
The CBC is left. Global, CTV are both left and have been for a good 18 years. G&M flirts with centre and centre-left and have for a decade.
Well played Google. This is precisely compliant with the letter of law and their agreement with the CRTC, while at the same time doesn't give legacy media the free paycheque they lobbied their friends in government for.
[удалено]
You know non-profits are required to have open books, right? We can see where that money is going. I suspect they would rather give the money to small independent outlets in an attempt to foster diverse media as opposed to giving it to post media outlet number #4103 (The Montreal Gazette in this case).
>You know non-profits are required to have open books, right? We can see where that money is going. We who? As in the CRA? Every business has to open their books for the CRA when asked. Non-profits have to file their taxes and are subject to audit, but this isn't really much different than any corporation.
Non profits share their financial statements, that's a lot different from "open books". Financial statements don't include lists of what entities got what payments, they have at most a dozen or so categories with some breakdowns on specific categories in the notes.
Another screw up from our good old liberals.
How so? The legislation was supposed to make sure Canadian media gets money. Canadian media is getting money. Seems to be working just fine.
Nothing to see here folks, just an American-owned paper throwing a fit because they didn't get a piece of Google's payout that was intended to help Canadian-owned content.
>Michael Taube is a columnist for four publications (National Post, Troy Media, Loonie Politics and Epoch Times) Mmmhmm.
Postmedia just mad they're not getting a cut.
Despite post media's (shocking) misgivings, I don't really see anything wrong with this yet. Pending the review by the CRTC this may just be Google wanting to foster a diverse set of independent news outlets that aren't beholden to the big players like post media. Diverse news is good for google because it drives traffic to their aggregation sites.
> Despite post media's (shocking) misgivings, I don't really see anything wrong with this yet. What's wrong with this is that it's a complete perversion of the intention of the law. The intention is to make Google pay the organizations that are driving traffic to Google. When you Google Canadian news, they're not serving links to these nobody lefty outlets. They're primarily serving links to the CBC, PostMedia publications, CTV, the Globe and Mail, and other legacy corporate media. Seriously, try it yourself. Google a topic of Canadian news interest. See how many pages through the results you need to go before you find one of the groups in the CJC, and see how many PostMedia or CBC links you get on earlier pages. If Google has found a way to subvert the intention of the Online News Act, then it means our government will need a new mechanism to force Google to pay the organizations generating its traffic. That means more legislation, more legal battles, more expense for the tax payer, and Canadian news outlets continue to get fucked by a foreign megacorporation in the mean time.
> organizations that are driving traffic to Google. > primarily serving links to the CBC So CBC driving traffic to Google or Google to CBC?
ah yes, poor National Post, I wonder how such a small and harmless news outlet will take the blow...
mighty pathetic hobbies nine fertile cake license ask muddle aloof *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You have it backwards. It's google that drives the traffic to cbc or global or postmedia or wherever. Anyone can just go to those sites on their own. But they don't. They choose Google first.
Just one of the many things the conservatives have to reverse to fix this country.
There's nothing to fix here, American owned Postmedia is just pissed they're not getting a cut.
[удалено]
Did you read the article? There are some legit concerns, especially around why a two month old non-profit is creating an agreement with Google (which includes indemnity.)
Nah. This is bell and rogers being salty. They lobbied the government for this bill. /r/canada shat all over it (rightfully so). So instead of blocking the news like meta did, google decided to go with a collective of independent outlets. It’s a brand new non-profit because these independent agencies needed a single group to bargain with google. Now it’s being framed as a bunch of “lefty media” because the traditional media in Canada leans right, they got cut out, and they happen to all be owned by bell and rogers. They got fucked by their own law and I’m pumped about it.
>because the traditional media in Canada leans right LOL What Canada have you been living in? Media in Canada have trended left minus a few outlets for the last 50 years. Even the Toronto Star had the moniker of The Red Star back in the 1980s. Global News of the 1980s was distinctly right-wing though.
[Canadian media is not left-leaning](https://www.readthemaple.com/election-endorsements/). If it was we wouldn't be seeing virtually every publication in the country routinely endorse Conservative politicians.
Canadian media is left-leaning. Endorsements are editorial - aka Opinion. The opinion section does not drive the news section, which is where bias is inherent in the reporting. Determining whether or not the publication is left, centre or right. How do you people still manage to mess this up repeatedly?
Newspaper: Tells everyone to vote Conservative for decades. You: Clearly they're biased towards the Liberals. Bit of a hot take there buddy, saying that they're left-leaning because articles that are expected to follow basic journalistic integrity such as fact checking is biased towards the left. They're allowed to print whatever they want in opinion pieces, that's how you find their bias.
Opinion section: This is who we think you should vote for. News section: Carries bias, with reporters own input on who you should vote for in every story leaking in. You younger kids really didn't get a very good education on how journalism is supposed to work, and how it currently works now. Guess the old timer we had back in the early 1990s that ran our city paper for 50 years was right, modern generations would be fundamentally ignorant on what is happening and confuse the two no matter what.
> Media in Canada have trended left 80% of print/digital media is post media. Owned by a republican tied new jersey hedge fund known for catch and killing for Donald Trump in 2016. They own and have shut down a fuck ton of small local papers to push their narrative. You gotta be outta your mind to think Canadian media is "left". The star is still "left" despite being owned by conservative donors. CBC is centre left. Global/ctv/globeandmail are all center right.
Hedge funds don't direct media, they only care about profitability. That's why they shutdown a "fuck ton of small local papers" that had already been reprinting news 4 days old. The internet killed them when they abandoned local news. The CBC is left. Global, CTV are both left and have been for a good 18 years. G&M flirts with centre and centre-left and have for a decade.